CHOTELAL RAMBRIJ PASWAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in these appeals is "in respect of one incident when Court found that the incident is an act of unlawful assembly- then whether Court is justified in convicting three appellants (out of six accused) by taking recourse to the provisions of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code?" The first incident refers to the assault on PWs-2, 3 and 4 (being the outcome of an act of unlawful assembly) whereas second incident refers to shifting the deceased by these appellants from one spot to another. Whether trial Court was justified "in holding that accused Nos.2, 5 and 6 have withdrawn themselves from the unlawful assembly when accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 shifted deceased from the first spot to another spot?"

(2.) The above issues have arisen from the judgment dated 12/01/2015 delivered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Vasai, District Thane in Sessions Case No. 44/2013. There were six accused persons put to trial. They were tried for committing offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and in the alternative for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There were two injured witnesses viz. PW-2 Hiralal Balu Jaiswal (first informant) and his wife PW-3 Mantha Jaiswal. Whereas, name of the deceased is also Hiralal, but he is Hiralal Deepchand Jaiswal. The outcome of the impugned judgment is as follows:-

(3.) In these three appeals, we are concerned with correctness of the judgment of conviction of these three appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 read with Section 149 and Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Original accused Nos. 2, 5 and 6 have not preferred appeals (as confirmed by learned Additional Public Prosecutor Smt. Deshmukh).